Pediatric subset of primary immunodeficiency patients treated with SCIG: post hoc analysis of SHIFT and IBIS pooled data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Primary immunodeficiencies (PID) constitute a heterogeneous group of more than 350 monogenetic diseases. PID patients with antibody impairment require lifelong administration of immunoglobulin G replacement therapy, administered either intravenously (IVIG) or subcutaneously (SCIG). Although the effectiveness of weekly and biweekly (every other week) SCIG administration has been shown in several trials, data on the viability of these two regimens in pediatric PID patients are sparse. METHODS: ) regimens. The primary endpoints were to evaluate trough IgG levels and cumulative monthly doses; the secondary endpoint was to analyze incidence of infections. RESULTS: Fifteen and 13 children from the SHIFT and IBIS studies were included, respectively. Cumulative 20%-concentrated SCIG monthly dose was slight lower for the biweekly regimen (Δ = - 2.04, 90% CI - 8.3 to 4.23). However, the trough IgG levels were similar between the two groups (Δ = 0.28, 90% CI - 0.51 to 1.07) and constantly above the threshold of 5 g/L. After adjusting for potential confounders, the annualized rate of infections was similar between SHIFT and IBIS patients (incidence rate ratio = 1.09, 90% CI 0.72-1.67); only 1 serious bacterial infection was experienced by a patient in the IBIS group. CONCLUSION: administrations appeared equally effective treatment options.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".